Biden: Conservative groups spending $200 billion on midterm elections

posted at 12:40 pm on October 25, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Remember, Barack Obama says that choosing Joe Biden to be one heartbeat away from the presidency is “the single best decision I have made.” At least Obama applied the right scale in his statement. Biden told Bloomberg News that Democrats would definitely hold the Senate and likely keep the House despite the “$200 billion” conservative groups have spent in the midterm elections:

Bloomberg News tried rescuing Biden from himself in their report:

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden says Democrats will retain control of the Senate while he worries that hundreds of millions of dollars in anonymous donations to campaign groups backing Republicans could cost his party its House majority.

That isn’t what Biden said, however. Isn’t a news organization supposed to report the news rather than act as a translator for math-challenged officeholders? The New York Times blog The Caucus does better:

“I was amazed at the amount of money, this $200 billion of money that is — where there’s no accountability,” he said. “When I say accountability, we don’t know where it’s coming from. There’s no disclosure, so the folks watching the ad can’t make a judgment based upon motive when you say it’s paid for by so-and-so.”

Mr. Biden clearly meant “million” with an “M,” not “billion” with a “B.”

But did he?

But his tongue slipped again a moment later. “So it really — I’ve never seen this before, so the only caveat I’d put in terms of the House is how much impact this $200 billion are going to mean.”

Million, billion, trillion … nothing this administration has done in two years demonstrates that they know the difference anyway.

But the president is right in believing that if people reject the agenda of the corporations that are spending money in this election, they can vote against it—and win. Americans are about as likely to vote for every candidate a corporation favors as they are to buy every product a corporation advertises.

It’s not as though Mammoth Amalgamated Corp. or China World Takeover Inc. is going out and paying citizens to cast Republican ballots. It’s not even as though corporations, foreign or domestic, are trying to buy off politicians with direct campaign contributions—which remain illegal.

All they can do is finance broadcast spots or newspaper ads with messages intended to sway voters. As more than half of all political candidates discover every election year, such efforts often fail. Unless the ads make a case that is persuasive and believable to a majority of voters, they are wasted.

Most corporate executives seem to understand as much and choose not to bother. When the Supreme Court decision came down, critics predicted a tidal wave of corporate spending on elections. What they overlooked is that in about half the states, such outlays were already allowed, without that dire consequence.

All the evidence indicates that corporate electioneering makes no difference in election outcomes or legislation. John Coleman, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, examined the period 2000-2008 and found that states permitting such spending were no more likely to have Republican legislatures, business-friendly regulatory policies, or low business costs.

As for the impact of outside groups in this election, perhaps Joe Biden should take a look at this chart:

The biggest outside-group spending in this election has come from government-employee unions, not the conservative groups, as the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. They have spent $171 million, compared to the combined total of the top two conservatives groups, which comes to $142 million. Unlike the conservative groups, the unions want more than hundreds of billions in extra government spending, they want trillions of government spending and expansion of the public sector. Those are the numbers which worry Americans.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

All they [corporations] can do is finance broadcast spots or newspaper ads with messages intended to sway voters. As more than half of all political candidates discover every election year, such efforts often fail. Unless the ads make a case that is persuasive and believable to a majority of voters, they are wasted.

I think that’s mostly true. However in those states that permit such corporate-funded ads, I can see where a local or state election can be turned because of massive funding for a candidate (judicial elections, for example).

I fully supported the ruling in Citizens United. But let’s no kid ourselves about the potential corruption that it might lead to.

But the solution to that, of course, is not to suppress the speech but prosecute the corrupt officials.

The point of this is not to directly persuade voters. The point is to get ahold of the donor lists so they can sick the IRS on them, deny them government grants and/or bus a bunch of union goons in to harass them.

WSJ:
Sacrosanct tax breaks, including deductions on mortgage interest, remain on the table just weeks before the deficit commission issues recommendations on policies to pare back with the aim of balancing the budget by 2015.

The tax benefits are hugely popular with the public but they have drawn the panel’s focus, in part because the White House has said these and other breaks cost the government about $1 trillion a year..

The rest came from a few of other guys I know; Sam, Joe, Tom and Rufus. We all hang out at the 49th street bar, you can find us there nearly every night, if you wanna talk to us. I’m the tall bald guy in the Hawaiian shirt and khaki pants.

The Founding Fathers designed a nation that can survive its fools as the head of the Federal Government. They never thought to design a system of government to prevent the President from intentionally trying to destroy the Nation.

On his Sunday show yesterday Chris Matthews spent a good five minutes chuckling and showing videos of gaffes made by Dan Quayle, Gerald Ford and George Bush. His roundtable of liberal puppetheads joined in the fun, laughing away at the republican “morons”.

No videos were shown of the Gaffe Master Joe Bite Me however.

Amazing isn’t it, with a republican coup just around the corner with the biggest win over the incompetent Democrats evah, Matthews decides to make fun of things republicans said decades ago.

Princess Nanny claimed last year that we were losing 500,000,000 jobs a month without the Porkulus program. Once or twice is a slip, but there seems to be a pattern of democratics not understanding very basic arithmetic.

Well, he’s going to be the President for a year and a half once Obamalinsky does the Perp walk after Darrell Issa gets done with him. I’m taking a ride to South Carolina(from Florida) to get fireworks this year to celebrate Joe becoming POTUS right around the Fourth of July…

The biggest outside-group spending in this election has come from government-employee unions, not the conservative groups, as the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. They have spent $171 million, compared to the combined total of the top two conservatives groups, which comes to $142 million.

It’s not as though Mammoth Amalgamated Corp. or China World Takeover Inc. is going out and paying citizens to cast Republican ballots. It’s not even as though corporations, foreign or domestic, are trying to buy off politicians with direct campaign contributions—which remain illegal.

All they can do is finance broadcast spots or newspaper ads with messages intended to sway voters.

How come no one makes this argument when talking about the influence of the unions on votes? Even if you jump up and down and sing the praises of unions, aren’t you alone when you cast your ballot? Or does belonging to a union mean you stopped thinking as a rational being and vote however your masters tell you?